Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus Species Isolated from Blood Culture: A Pathogen or a Contaminant?

Pranjali Sanjay Bhosle, V. Thakar, M. Modak
{"title":"Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus Species Isolated from Blood Culture: A Pathogen or a Contaminant?","authors":"Pranjali Sanjay Bhosle, V. Thakar, M. Modak","doi":"10.7860/njlm/2022/55619.2671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS) are the most frequent blood culture isolates and an important cause of nosocomial blood stream infections especially in catheterised patients. CoNS are also the most common contaminants of blood cultures and are proven to be especially problematic. These uncertainties may result in over diagnosis and indirect overuse of antimicrobials especially vancomycin. Aim: To determine the clinical significance of CoNS isolated from blood culture of patients admitted in a tertiary care hospital. Materials and Methods: A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in Bharati Hospital Research Center, Pune, Maharashtra, India, from August 2019 to July 2020 (One year). Patients whose paired/multiple blood culture samples showed pure growth of CoNS were included in the study. CoNS were identified by Vitek 2 system and antimicrobial susceptibility was reported. Clinical history of all patients was taken who showed pure growth of CoNS in either one or multiple sites of the automated blood culture bottles. Isolated CoNS were considered as pathogen only if clinical and laboratory parameters are fulfilled. Chi-square test was used to find out statistical significance of isolated pathogenic CoNS. Results: A total 147 CoNS isolated from blood cultures of suspected patients of sepsis were included in study. About 23 (15.6%) CoNS were isolated from both the sites. Remaining 124 (84.4%) CoNS were isolated from single site. CoNS were considered as pathogen in all 23 cases based on clinical and laboratory criteria. The most frequent isolated CoNS was S. haemolyticus 7 (30.4%), followed by S. epidermidis 5 (21.7%), S. hominis 3 (13.1%) , S. lugdunensis 3 (13.1%), S. scuiri 2 (8.7%), S. xylosus 1 (4.3%), S. caprae 1 (4.3%), S. capitis 1 (4.3%). Methicillin resistance was observed in 15 (65.2%) CoNS strains. Conclusion: Patients suffering from CoNS from their blood stream should be carefully evaluated clinically. Proper blood collection techniques need to be followed to avoid contamination of blood culture samples and to avoid diagnostic dilemma.","PeriodicalId":31115,"journal":{"name":"National Journal of Laboratory Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Journal of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7860/njlm/2022/55619.2671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS) are the most frequent blood culture isolates and an important cause of nosocomial blood stream infections especially in catheterised patients. CoNS are also the most common contaminants of blood cultures and are proven to be especially problematic. These uncertainties may result in over diagnosis and indirect overuse of antimicrobials especially vancomycin. Aim: To determine the clinical significance of CoNS isolated from blood culture of patients admitted in a tertiary care hospital. Materials and Methods: A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in Bharati Hospital Research Center, Pune, Maharashtra, India, from August 2019 to July 2020 (One year). Patients whose paired/multiple blood culture samples showed pure growth of CoNS were included in the study. CoNS were identified by Vitek 2 system and antimicrobial susceptibility was reported. Clinical history of all patients was taken who showed pure growth of CoNS in either one or multiple sites of the automated blood culture bottles. Isolated CoNS were considered as pathogen only if clinical and laboratory parameters are fulfilled. Chi-square test was used to find out statistical significance of isolated pathogenic CoNS. Results: A total 147 CoNS isolated from blood cultures of suspected patients of sepsis were included in study. About 23 (15.6%) CoNS were isolated from both the sites. Remaining 124 (84.4%) CoNS were isolated from single site. CoNS were considered as pathogen in all 23 cases based on clinical and laboratory criteria. The most frequent isolated CoNS was S. haemolyticus 7 (30.4%), followed by S. epidermidis 5 (21.7%), S. hominis 3 (13.1%) , S. lugdunensis 3 (13.1%), S. scuiri 2 (8.7%), S. xylosus 1 (4.3%), S. caprae 1 (4.3%), S. capitis 1 (4.3%). Methicillin resistance was observed in 15 (65.2%) CoNS strains. Conclusion: Patients suffering from CoNS from their blood stream should be carefully evaluated clinically. Proper blood collection techniques need to be followed to avoid contamination of blood culture samples and to avoid diagnostic dilemma.
血培养中分离的凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌:病原体还是污染物?
简介:凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌(con)是最常见的血培养分离株,也是院内血流感染的重要原因,特别是在导管患者中。CoNS也是血液培养物中最常见的污染物,并且被证明是特别有问题的。这些不确定性可能导致过度诊断和间接过度使用抗菌素,特别是万古霉素。目的:探讨三级医院患者血培养分离CoNS的临床意义。材料与方法:前瞻性横断面研究于2019年8月至2020年7月在印度马哈拉施特拉邦浦那巴拉蒂医院研究中心进行(1年)。配对/多次血培养样本显示con纯生长的患者纳入研究。用Vitek - 2系统鉴定并报告其药敏。所有在自动血培养瓶的一个或多个部位显示con纯生长的患者均记录临床病史。只有在符合临床和实验室参数的情况下,分离的con才被认为是病原体。结果:从疑似脓毒症患者血培养中分离的147例致病性con纳入研究。两个位点共分离出23株(15.6%)。其余124例(84.4%)从单个位点分离得到。根据临床和实验室标准,23例病例均被认为是病原体。以溶血链球菌7号(30.4%)最多,其次为表皮链球菌5号(21.7%)、人型链球菌3号(13.1%)、lugdunensis 3号(13.1%)、scuiri链球菌2号(8.7%)、木糖链球菌1号(4.3%)、caprae链球菌1号(4.3%)、caprae链球菌1号(4.3%)、capitis链球菌1号(4.3%)。15株(65.2%)对甲氧西林耐药。结论:临床应仔细评估经血流感染的con患者。需要遵循适当的采血技术,以避免血液培养样本的污染和避免诊断困境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信